Current Districts Map. Who is next?

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

My point is, you can develop key volunteers as you expand. It would be a big jump the first year for MN, simply because of the size - they should have gone to districts 2 or 3 years ago. But I understand why they didn't, because they had so many new rookie teams in the years prior, they couldn't handle districts then. If they don't go to districts soon, though, the initial implementation will only get worse.

Unpopular suggestion that is probably borderline crazy... The scale of MN presents an issue, they would need at least 2 events a week during competition to go to districts. From some mapping I did a couple weeks ago I noticed that the overwhelming majority of MN teams are fairly clustered. I propose a reduction in team population in the short term (3-5 years). Merging together multiple teams would result in smaller team populations, likely reduce strain on smaller teams and reduce competition for sponsors. It could also make it feasible to transition to the District model due to reduced event requirements.

If you say that the volunteer base can support 8 events... reduce to 160 teams. It should be possible.